linux-kernel - [PATCH] numa: mark __next_node() as __always

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20211206161745.39028-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
Date:   Mon,  6 Dec 2021 17:17:45 +0100
From:   Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: [PATCH] numa: mark __next_node() as __always_inline to fix section mismatch

Clang (13) uninlines __next_node() which emits the following warning
due to that this function is used in init code (amd_numa_init(),
sched_init_numa() etc.):

WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x927ee): Section mismatch
in reference from the function __next_node() to the variable
.init.data:numa_nodes_parsed
The function __next_node() references
the variable __initdata numa_nodes_parsed.
This is often because __next_node lacks a __initdata
annotation or the annotation of numa_nodes_parsed is wrong.

Mark __next_node() as __always_inline() so it won't get uninlined.
bloat-o-meter over x86_64 binaries says this:

scripts/bloat-o-meter -c vmlinux.baseline vmlinux
add/remove: 1/1 grow/shrink: 2/7 up/down: 446/-2166 (-1720)
Function                                     old     new   delta
apply_wqattrs_cleanup                          -     410    +410
amd_numa_init                                814     842     +28
sched_init_numa                             1338    1346      +8
find_next_bit                                 38      19     -19
__next_node                                   45       -     -45
apply_wqattrs_prepare                       1069     799    -270
wq_nice_store                                688     414    -274
wq_numa_store                                805     433    -372
wq_cpumask_store                             789     402    -387
apply_workqueue_attrs                        538     147    -391
workqueue_set_unbound_cpumask                947     539    -408
Total: Before=14422603, After=14420883, chg -0.01%

So it's both win-win in terms of resolving section mismatch and
saving some text size (-1.7 Kb is quite nice).

Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>
---
 include/linux/nodemask.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/nodemask.h b/include/linux/nodemask.h
index 567c3ddba2c4..55ba2c56f39b 100644
--- a/include/linux/nodemask.h
+++ b/include/linux/nodemask.h
@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ static inline int __first_node(const nodemask_t *srcp)
 }
 
 #define next_node(n, src) __next_node((n), &(src))
-static inline int __next_node(int n, const nodemask_t *srcp)
+static __always_inline int __next_node(int n, const nodemask_t *srcp)
 {
 	return min_t(int,MAX_NUMNODES,find_next_bit(srcp->bits, MAX_NUMNODES, n+1));
 }
-- 
2.33.1